|
RE: Why no love for Secret Weapons?
An Iron Curtain game would require entirely new scenarios or reworking of the old from Iron Curtain, Patton's Nightmare, and Hammer & Sickle as they used components from too many games. Lots of work for a product that I suspect did not sell that well in the first place.
Matt put in a lot of effort to rework the Go For Broke scenarios for the second edition and, from my perspective, that (precious) time should have been spent elsewhere.
River Fleet may be cool but writing 9 pages of rules took me over 180 hours but that includes the testing of the mechanics to ensure there were no contradictions within the new River Boat rules and against the existing PG rules. Add the time for Matt to create the scenarios and then for us to develop them and we spent nearly as much time on this supplement as we did on a 40-scenario box game. Considering there are no recorded plays on PG-HQ, I have my doubts whether this was time well spent.
Why I am saying this?
Because BAOR is interesting in theory but I am not sure it's worth the effort, especially if it requires an entirely new set of rules.
If Jim Stears reads this, I would be curious to know how long it took to rewrite the SSWAS rules.
I 've playtested games for several companies and it usually takes me between 30 to 120 minutes per page to review the rules (and subsequent corrections). Thirty minutes of the rules are standard, hundred and twenty minutes (and sometimes much longer) if it's new or unusual concepts. I like but in moderation.
|
